| "eToys Inc. Drops etoy Suit - For Real This Time" |
Login/Create an Account
| 139 comments | Search Discussion |
Now.. (Score:4, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25, @10:09PM EST
(#1)
|
Now, Slashdot needs another company to bash. Who's next in the queue?
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Now.. (Score:1)
by garcia
(garcia@lazylightning.org) on Tuesday January 25, @10:39PM EST
(#39)
(User
Info) http://www.tusa.org
|
it is more of a revolving door...
MSFT -> company that tries to steal domain -> MSFT -> bastards trying to persecute hackers for cracking stuff -> MSFT -> etc.
-/- Bill -/-
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
simple business decision? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @03:34AM EST
(#120)
|
Has anyone been thinking that this whole ordeal was going to be forgotten after the holidays anyway? There's no real incentive for etoys.com to persue etoy.com if it's not during a peak period. Call it a conspiracy theory, but etoys probably never expected to take this the whole way.
Anyone think that etoy.com had a predisposition in this whole case? i.e. they know what was going to happen and maybe got a kick back from etoys? Hmmmm....
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Without written statement of indemnity... (Score:2, Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25, @10:48PM EST
(#42)
|
and written, signed by etoys.com trademark owners that they shall forever hold etoy.com harmless, etc. this remains, a temporary situation and can still reverse at any time. What proof is there otherwise? Words over a phone? Feh.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
But will they do it again? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25, @11:40PM EST
(#78)
|
Anyone want to bet this is not permanent? I won't be surprised if etoys once again sues etoy when next Christmas comes around just to make sure nobody mistakes their site during their busy time of the year. This could be a yearly event.
IMHO, I think etoy should countersue etoys just to get something back for all the trouble etoys has caused them. That might get the message out to all the other sue-happy companies out there that they can't use the courts as their tax funded bludgeon.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:But will they do it again? (Score:1)
by peeping_Thomist on Wednesday January 26, @01:04AM EST
(#106)
(User
Info) |
I won't be surprised if etoys once again sues etoy when next Christmas comes around...
That assumes that Etoys will still be around next Christmas -- not something I'd bet much money on right now.
Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
I have one to trash.. (Score:3, Insightful)
by Weezul
(weasel@havoc.spam.gtf.org) on Tuesday January 25, @11:05PM EST
(#49)
(User
Info) http://havoc.gtf.org/weasel
|
I say we go after the people who are harassing Jon Johansen in Norway. These include the state attorney (Ms Inger Marie Sunde; relevent post) and the law firm which pulled the strings
(relevent post). These people need to be "informed" of the error of their way.. or crusified if they will not reform. It would be especially helpful if people would track down the law firm's customers, so we can complain to them.
[switching back to topic of this article] I'll be curious to see the real analysis of the etoy thing. I'd love to think that we really hurt their stock price.
Also, I should say that I really liked the style of the etoy press release. These guys are pretty good.
Jeff
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:I have one to trash.. (Score:1)
by GossG
(ggoss@direct.ca) on Wednesday January 26, @02:51AM EST
(#116)
(User
Info) |
] I'll be curious to see the real analysis of the etoy thing. I'd love to think that we really hurt their stock price.
The discussion I saw on it claimed that the price was largely related to a combination of volume problems over christmas, and a freeing of locked-in shares from the IPO (or something like that) that were finally allowed to be sold by people who'd held them for a long time. I forget where I read the discussions about etoys' post-christmas dive into the share-price dumpster, but they rated the feud with etoy to be a distant third to these two factors.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Now.. (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25, @11:43PM EST
(#81)
|
I heard of a company named Bendover.net that pays lip service to the open source movement, but keeps allegedly GPL'd code closed.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Why does this get a "2" from moderators? (Score:1)
by w3woody
(woody@alumni.caltech.edu) on Wednesday January 26, @03:15AM EST
(#118)
(User
Info) http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~woody
|
Actually, and this is so totally off topic I don't know why I'm posting this here, is that if you get enough positive karma, your posts automagically show up as a +2 by default.
Go figure.
Now I have this little button down below that allows me to set it to +1 instead of +2; normally I select that when I submit a random bit of blathering like this. But I forgot to moderate myself down when I posted the above.
Sorry 'bout that.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Slashdot (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @04:56AM EST
(#123)
|
This is stupidity.
1) do you know how easy it is to build a slashdot like site?
2) there are already plenty of alternatives
3) give me an articulated argument why I should boycott slashdot and I will
I do realize that it is hypocritical to be a center of open source information, yet not practice it -- but give them a break. I'm sure they are busy working on many things and will release their code soon enough.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Here's a new target... (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @12:34AM EST
(#101)
|
How about bashing fast food restaurants for employing so many Slashdotters in eight-hour-a-day burger-flipping jobs that give them spending money to buy computers (but not enough to move out of their parents' basement) to use for whining about companies?
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
. . . (Score:1)
by fezzgig on Tuesday January 25, @10:10PM EST
(#2)
(User
Info) |
sometimes you've just got to appreciate the gracious use of internet slang and caps lock that people use to make a point these days.
-fezzgig |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:. . . (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25, @11:31PM EST
(#73)
|
There's no mistaking an etoy.STATEMENT for a statement from anyone else. I had to think for a while about what it reminded me of, and the closest I could think of was taking names like "eToys" or "JavaScript" to their logical conclusions. I have to say that in ordinary English, I can't stand capitalization in the middle of the word and view it as the corporate takeover of the English language. But the etoy.STYLE is so outlandish I'm just caught off guard. I suppose that's their intent; I really enjoy it.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:. . . (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @11:00AM EST
(#136)
|
Oh I don't know... I read it and I hear Dieter from Sprockets speaking (ie mike meyers SNL skit)
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Three cheers (Score:0, Redundant)
by uninerd on Tuesday January 25, @10:12PM EST
(#4)
(User
Info) |
For lawyers!
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Mistake (Score:3, Funny)
by jawad
(jawad(at)nycap.rr.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:12PM EST
(#5)
(User
Info) http://jawad.org/
|
artiste writes "The NY Times tech section is reporting that eToys is dropping the suit against the artists group, etoy." (Free reg. required to read). eToy "dropped" the suit earlier, but not all the way. This time it looks like they've really and truly surrendered. They're even paying etoy's legal bills. Click Below to read etoy's e-mailed press release.
You mean eToys dropped the suit earlier. Probably obvious, but the subtle difference between "eToy" and "eToys" is what started the suit anyway.
sid=moderation |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
spelling and grammar and greed (Score:1)
by RoLlEr_CoAsTeR
(httpdaemon@iname.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:14PM EST
(#7)
(User
Info) http://www.crosswinds.net/~gertuine
|
You mean eToys dropped the suit earlier. Probably obvious, but the subtle difference between "eToy" and "eToys" is what started the suit anyway.
Exactly. And if you ask me, that's when and where it should have been stopped. End of story.
"If we all did what we were supposed to do, we'd all be doing what
we're supposed to be doing. But then, who knows what we're supposed to
be doing?" |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
sigh (Score:1)
by JustShootMe
(rmilleratduskglowdotnospamdotcom) on Tuesday January 25, @10:13PM EST
(#6)
(User
Info) http://www.duskglow.com
|
Yeah, a little company won a battle against one company. But in the fact if the DVD/CCA issues going on, I see no reason to celebrate.
/p
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Catch your very own geek - http://www.singlegeek.com |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Bummer (Score:3, Insightful)
by Duxup
(pointandlaugh@hotmail.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:20PM EST
(#17)
(User
Info) http://8421.net/
|
If you’re waiting for a perfect world with no questionable lawsuits, you won't ever be celebrating. I enjoy it for what it is. *raise glass and take a drink*
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:sigh (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25, @11:21PM EST
(#63)
|
Don't hold your breath. Once this DeCSS stuff clears up, I'm going to sue Linus over his use of the phrase "world domination" which I patented back in 1991
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
A truly great thing. (Score:2, Insightful)
by davidu
(davidu@angrywhitemale.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:15PM EST
(#8)
(User
Info) http://www.mp3.com
|
Lets hope that the DVD-CCA lawsuit goes away like this one did -- down the drain! With all the support Etoy had and the support DeCSS has, it should be no problem to overcome corporate greed.
- Does anyone wonder what would happen if there were a judge who was actually net-competant?
- Would these cases take this long?
- Has anyone ever had a great judge who understood computers and the net?
-Davidu
Check it out...the revolution is happening. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:A truly great thing. (Score:1)
by forehead
(forehead2k@yahoo.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:27PM EST
(#23)
(User
Info) |
I agree with the sentiment. However, the MPAA has far deeper pockets (and far thicker skulls) than eToys. I suspect we have a hell of a lot of work ahead.
--
It occurred to me lately that nothing has occurred to me lately. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:A truly great thing. (Score:1)
by Trejus on Tuesday January 25, @10:31PM EST
(#27)
(User
Info) |
I don't think that there are is any parelell between the etoys law suit and the DVD-CCA one. In fact the only similarity is that a big guy is trying to smash the little guy. For one, the DVD suit is due to a conglomerate out to keep people from distributing their merchandise for free, instead of paying the companies for it. Also, if the decryptons codes are readily availible, this companies also lose thier power over the market. The only case close to this one is the RIAA vs MP3 and niether of these are going to go away anytime soon.
-- Trejus (The Great Roman Emperor) |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:A truly great thing. (Score:2)
by davidu
(davidu@angrywhitemale.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:34PM EST
(#33)
(User
Info) http://www.mp3.com
|
In fact the only similarity is that a big
guy is trying to smash the little guy.
Hehe, that is the similarity. You are completely correct about the RIAA vs. MP3.com suit but I left that out of my post. I knew someone else would mention it.
-Davidu
Check it out...the revolution is happening. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:A truly great thing. (Score:3, Insightful)
by TheGratefulNet
(bryanFNORD@gratefulFNORD.net (-FNORD)) on Tuesday January 25, @11:07PM EST
(#51)
(User
Info) http://www.Grateful.Net
|
| Does anyone wonder what would happen if there were a judge who was actually net-competant?
how about other entities?
for example, I applied for that oh-so-cheesy linux logo credit card. [yeah, I'm a sucker for penguins]. I used my brand new PO box as my mailing address - I'm trying to cut down on the # of places that have my real physical addr - right to privacy and all..
so anyway, I get this letter in my PO box asking for verification of my addr (since my credit history only lists my street addr). I call the issuing bank up and read the case # (and other special #'s that were on that letter I received) to the bank guy - as proof that I did in fact get the letter and I am who I say I am. so even though I can recite the special check codes I listed on the credit app, etc, - still no dice - the bank guy insists on getting a copy of a utility bill or similar that goes to this PO box. (ok - how many utility bills do YOU have that go to your PO box?)
I then ask the bank guy (who, whether he realizes it or not, is representing linux via the linux credit card) if he has net access (since I remember that my PO box is listed as my whois record address. and of course he's clueless about that whole whois thing. I guess I should have expected as such ;-(
so anyway, I guess us neticens who spend way too much time online assume that many other folks are net.versant. and of course, its still only like 5-10% of the US pop who's really online.
well - the banks - I can live with them as they are. it was a pain to resubmit my credit app all over again (using my actual street addr. this time) but I did it and now have that shiny penguin in my pocket [vbg].
but when it comes to things legal, I DO expect our judges and lawyers to be net.versant (when arguing and deciding things in that domain). and of course they're not aware of technology and this field - so things like the DVD/decss crap drags on and on, usually heading in the wrong direction. and spam laws are still slow to be put on the books. oh, and now that guy from Norway is harassed by his gov't who clearly seems clueless on the actual subject at hand.
sigh...
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer." |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Judges who get it (Score:2, Interesting)
by Jim Tyre
(j(dot)s(dot)tyre(at)cyberpass(dot)net) on Wednesday January 26, @02:21AM EST
(#113)
(User
Info) http://censorware.org
|
Has anyone ever had a great judge who understood computers and the net?
Partial list:
Three Judge District Court Panel in CDA I, and, to a lesser extent, The Nine in that same case;
District Court Judge in CDA II;
District Court Judge and two of three Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judges in Bernstein;
Ninth Circuit panel ruling morphed child porn provisions unconstitutional;
Various federal District Court and Appellate Judges in Blumenthal v. AOL and Zeran v. AOL holding that service providers are not liable for (alleged) libel of content provider;
District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema, in Virginia, for holding that Loudoun County's mandatory censorware policy in the public library was unconstitutional;
Any number of judges, state and federal, who have held that the mere fact that a web site can be accessed in the State of the Plaintiff does not mean that the Defendant automatically can be sued in that State.
There are any number of other examples -- and IAAL -- but the basic points are these:
Like anything else in the law, it takes time for the the law, and the Judges who rule on it, to catch up;
Despite that, and not ignoring the "bad" cases, there are plenty of good rulings, plenty of good judges already out there, and as more do "get it", the numbers figure to grow.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Comparison (Score:1)
by neildogg
(fwds@suck.alot) on Tuesday January 25, @10:15PM EST
(#9)
(User
Info) http://wwwmasterz.com
|
"We survived their brute force. It's minds over money."
-etoy
-Linux Torvalds (someday)
"Don't marvel at how credit cards stick to magnets" |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Comparison (Score:1)
by KegDude
(KegDude@wildmail.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:34PM EST
(#32)
(User
Info) |
| "We survived their brute force. It's minds over money."
Actually, it's probably the money that made eToys change their mind. Their stock chart shows a pretty good slide down, from the 60's and 70's to the 20's, in the last couple of months. Ouch.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Comparison (Score:1)
by soygreen on Tuesday January 25, @10:58PM EST
(#46)
(User
Info) |
You actually think the ETYS stock price is affected by propaganda from the likes of RTMARK? Think again. Read the comments from stock analysts on ETYS. There is no relationship.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Wow, something finally goes right (Score:5, Insightful)
by jfunk
(jfunk@roadrunner.nf.net) on Tuesday January 25, @10:17PM EST
(#12)
(User
Info) http://exnihilo.dhs.org
|
After reading about certain events in the ongoing DVD scuffle over the past while, we now have something to be happy about.
But...
Etoy simply backed down, rather than have a court rule on it. I was kind of hoping (like many others) that this would set a precendent to avoid this kind of crap in the future.
I hope something like this doesn't happen again, or the accused would be back to square one. Another thing to note is that Etoy fought *hard* to retain their rights, much harder than most people would. I have incredible respect for those guys. I hope the victims of any future abuse follow their example.
Jimmie Funk, doctor of soul. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Wow, something finally goes right (Score:2, Insightful)
by DMuse on Tuesday January 25, @11:07PM EST
(#52)
(User
Info) |
| I was kind of hoping (like many others) that this would set a precendent to avoid this kind of crap in the future
Oh come on now, Remember what drives the corporate world. Stock Price Occasionally one attempts to increase stock price through law suit. In this case the law suit resulted in the stock price falling 75% to below it's IPO value. What better precedent could you ask for. What board of directors would tolerate the stock price plummeting. I'm surprised heads haven't yet rolled at eToys.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Wow, something finally goes right (Score:0, Troll)
by soygreen on Tuesday January 25, @11:09PM EST
(#55)
(User
Info) |
| Another thing to note is that Etoy fought *hard* to retain
their rights, much harder than most people would. I have incredible respect for those guys.
What was it that won your respect? Was it when they put pictures of toys and links to fake stock information on their front page in order to confuse people who got there by accident? Was it their use of "the fucking flash plug-in"? Or was it when they put the word "Playboy" in their META tags? Truly a bunch of modern day Renoirs here.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Wow, something finally goes right (Score:2)
by jfunk
(jfunk@roadrunner.nf.net) on Wednesday January 26, @12:14AM EST
(#89)
(User
Info) http://exnihilo.dhs.org
|
They turned down a lot of money.
They are artists. They expressed themselves.
You appear to be offended by offensive language. I am not. It's expression and I'm going to defend their right to do it.
I'm sorry, but your Tipper Gore attitude is not going to win me over, especially since I'm a musician.
Jimmie Funk, doctor of soul. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Wow, something finally goes right (Score:1)
by Yardley on Wednesday January 26, @08:34AM EST
(#130)
(User
Info) |
I'm with you, Jimmie Funk. The courts and coporations seem not to realize that simply not understanding some else's form of expression does not allow suppression of that expression. Whether interpreting how an encryption scheme works, or using a domain name similar to that of a corporate entity (in this case, a domain name secured well before the corporation came into existence), the right to voice one's self is an inalienable right. The Constituion spells it out, but the people themselves know they should have this right to speak and express, whether written in stone or screamed into the wind.
One's and zero's -- perhaps streamlined, but the electrons flow for one reason only: the sharing of information, the expression of a person's view into the world...
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Wow, something finally goes right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @12:17AM EST
(#92)
|
The fact they stuck with it did is what I respect. Actually, I don't care for their art, but I do care for their ability to offend and annoy without the interference of a bunch of corporate visigoths. I cheerfully accept being offended and scoured by vulgarity if that means we all can express ourselves without being e-Mugged.
Gregm
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
(after christmas) (Score:1)
by patSPLAT
(p.may.1@theloveoftheworldalumni.nyu.edu) on Wednesday January 26, @01:54PM EST
(#139)
(User
Info) http://www.monmouth.com/~patrick-may
|
um... E-toys pushed for the injunction in a case it would likely lose right before Christmas, then drops the case graciously afterwards?
Though I'm sure etoy is happy to have their domain back, I'm not so sure they appreciate being hassled so much just to clear up the holiday roadmap.
And I doubt if etoys is really backing down in the face of opposition -- it's a winwin situation for them. If they got away with it, no more nasty anti-corporate site one letter away. And even if not, they still got a clear christmas.
Remove theloveoftheworld from email to mail |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
A Victory (Score:2, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25, @10:17PM EST
(#13)
|
Now our favorite socialist art group haswon against the evil capitalists we can go out and press for victory in the realms of DeCSS and others!!! We need to get our GNU/GPL message and socialist pamphlets out!!!
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Um..is this for real? (Score:3, Funny)
by pirodude
(mbrez@execpc.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:17PM EST
(#14)
(User
Info) ^|||://______...//\\//\\...______\\:|||^
|
Is this a real press release?
Last time i checked
IT WAS A PLEASURE TO DO BUSINESS WITH ONE OF THE BIGGEST E-COMMERCE GIANTS IN THE WORLD: F*U*C*K*I*N*G* INTENSE & REALLY EXPENSIVE BUT A KICK FOR ALL OF US! WE ALL LEARNED A LOT.
was not common in an offical press release.
"Its not a bug...just think of it as a new undocumented feature" - M$ TechSupport |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Um..is this for real? (Score:2)
by roblimo
(roblimo.nojunk@slashdot.org) on Tuesday January 25, @10:27PM EST
(#22)
(User
Info) |
Um, it's a real *etoy* press release. They're not exactly straight-line corporate people, okay?
Most press releases are sleep-inducing. At least etoy is interesting. And (just maybe) that's why they are so loved in online art circles.
:-)
- Robin "roblimo" Miller
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Um..is this for real? (Score:0, Troll)
by Foogle. on Tuesday January 25, @11:39PM EST
(#76)
(User
Info) |
Stupid Stupid Slashdotter!! I am a karma-whore! KNOW THY ENEMY, FOR HE IS THE FOOGLE! HAHA, You thought I actually cared!!?! Blah Blah Blah Yackity Schmackity Blah Blah Moo
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Um..is this for real? (Score:1)
by jesser on Wednesday January 26, @12:13AM EST
(#88)
(User
Info) http://www.palosverdes.com/jesse/
|
There was also a link to a new york times article at the top of the slashdot article. (I think the reason you often see the second paragraph repeating the first on slashdot is that readers sometimes forget what the first paragraph said, and start reading the second.)
--
slashdot: I miss my free time, Rob. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Good news (Score:1)
by =w= on Tuesday January 25, @10:19PM EST
(#15)
(User
Info) |
Good news, but how much longer until another stupid lawsuit comes up? Honestly not all lawyers/business people will be able to learn their leason from Etoy/Etoys.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Makes you wonder (Score:1)
by SuperBeast on Tuesday January 25, @10:21PM EST
(#18)
(User
Info) |
Gee, it seems that this lawsuit lasted just about as long as the holiday shopping season. Could it be that etoys filed suit to keep holiday shoppers from wandering onto etoy's site and then going to toysrus.com because they couldn't find etoys? And now the case has been dropped, if etoys was really in this for copyright infringement wouldn't they have pressed the case further?
---
I think, therefore I exist, anything outside of that is uncertain. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Expensive... (Score:1)
by Ranger Nik
(nik@spam.proof.nanospace.com) on Wednesday January 26, @03:44AM EST
(#121)
(User
Info) |
if you know what lawyers cost, it would seem excessively expensive on etoyS part to do it just for the shopping season...
i mean, if a lot depended on it, yes, but if it is just some people who can't type URLs but know how to complain... well... BAD INVESTMENT.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Hmm... toywar.com? (Score:1)
by jblackman
(blackman@mail.utexas.edu) on Tuesday January 25, @10:28PM EST
(#24)
(User
Info) http://129.116.45.102
|
For the last couple weeks, I've been taking part in etoy's "game" over at toywar.com, and while surely its effect isn't solely responsible for the settlement, I'm wonder what sort of part it played.
It was quite well-done, well-implemented and occasionally even subtle satire, and it probably attracted the sort of people that might be able to make their sensible voices heard by Etoys.
Hell, even if it didn't, it was a remarkably interesting and innovative way to battle the 800 pound corporate gorillas, and it was an honor to serve :)
If you're an etoy.agent, feel free to say 'hi' sometime or if you haven't taken a look at it yet, you might want to try to sign up as soon as possible. My alias is John.Prime and I guess I'll see y'all on the battlefield. Fight the power...
-jay
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Hmm... toywar.com? (Score:1)
by Comte on Tuesday January 25, @11:43PM EST
(#80)
(User
Info) |
Yes, it was a very well-executed piece of media virus, and I too was proud to serve! I think the one big lesson that was learned here (and one that as an artist, I am surprised to see similar communities continually RE-learning recently), is that a sufficiently large group of talented, creative people united for a common cause CAN have a tremendously positive impact! I think we are already beginning to see this energy spill over into the DVD/DeCSS situation, and it is my sincere hope that the community that was formed to support etoy.com will continue to exist, grow, thrive and seek out avenues to use this groundswell to make the internet a realm where the freedom to create will not be squashed.
Semper Ars
Chris Comte
etoy.AGENT Capt._Yosarian
Semper Ars
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
THE CAPS LOCK KEY... (Score:1, Funny)
by cperciva
(cperciva@sfu.ca) on Tuesday January 25, @10:31PM EST
(#28)
(User
Info) |
is in the middle of the left side of the keyboard.
If they considered using it, etoy's press releases might be a little more legible.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:THE CAPS LOCK KEY... (Score:1)
by nutsy
(mattm@infinetSPAMKILLER.com) on Tuesday January 25, @11:05PM EST
(#50)
(User
Info) |
Not to.MENTION if they.STOPPED putting.PERIODS between.WORDS. All
the.WORLD is a domain.NAME to these.GUYS, i.GUESS.
much.CONGRATULATIONS to.ETOY on.WINNING, now brush.UP on
your.GRAMMAR!
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
What are the chances that this will never happen? (Score:1)
by HowIsMyDriving?
(bornslippy@mindspring.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:32PM EST
(#29)
(User
Info) |
I think that this does not mean the end of internet sqatting problems. Right now there is a case aginst some guy in Canada who regestered his name, and is being sued by a NHL player becuase he thought that the guy will give it up.
Wake up, if a large corperation wants your name, they will get 20 Lawyers and drain your money. In this case this didn't happen and eToy got their name back. The average joe internet when faced with a knock on the door will be scared and give up the domain name, pull the web site, etc.. We need a site on the internet that lists all the pending legal actions aginst domain name squatting, having a legit web page being pulled (I am not talking about the WarEZ D00Dz) or lawsuits involving internet flaiming.
Sorry about the long rant
I needed to get it out.
Q: Why did the chicken cross the Moebius strip...
A:To get to the other ... er .. um .. never mind. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
What are the chances that this will never happen? (Score:0, Redundant)
by HowIsMyDriving?
(bornslippy@mindspring.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:32PM EST
(#31)
(User
Info) |
I think that this does not mean the end of internet sqatting problems. Right now there is a case aginst some guy in Canada who regestered his name, and is being sued by a NHL player becuase he thought that the guy will give it up.
Wake up, if a large corperation wants your name, they will get 20 Lawyers and drain your money. In this case this didn't happen and eToy got their name back. The average joe internet when faced with a knock on the door will be scared and give up the domain name, pull the web site, etc.. We need a site on the internet that lists all the pending legal actions aginst domain name squatting, having a legit web page being pulled (I am not talking about the WarEZ D00Dz) or lawsuits involving internet flaiming.
Sorry about the long rant
I needed to get it out.
Q: Why did the chicken cross the Moebius strip...
A:To get to the other ... er .. um .. never mind. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Domain (Score:3, Interesting)
by gothic
(axe@crown.net) on Tuesday January 25, @10:35PM EST
(#34)
(User
Info) |
As of 2000, Jan 25 - 9:45 Central time, I still cannot resolve (www.)etoy.com. Is this still the 'problem' with NSI? Or is it now a problem with the DNS server at the ISP? Could anyone let me know?
--There's a cow parked in my driveway-- |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Domain (Score:1)
by Mr. Penguin
(brad.johnson@ryobi.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:54PM EST
(#44)
(User
Info) http://mrpenguin.org
|
DNS at their ISP is probably fine, but the DNS at your own ISP isn't! It takes up to two days for some DNS boxes to update, depending on what your local server admin has it set to. If you want to know for sure, you can set your local Linux box up to be a small-time DNS server, and poll the root name servers (the official ones). Check the How-To's to find out how!
Brad Johnson
Webmaster
http://mrpenguin.org
johnsonb@ryobi.com
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Domain (Score:2, Informative)
by ShinGouki
(gouki at linux0wnsyou dot com) on Tuesday January 25, @11:14PM EST
(#58)
(User
Info) http://linux0wnsyou.com/
|
from their whois record:
Domain Name: ETOY.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: NS.C3.NET
Name Server: NS.DESK.NL
Updated Date: 10-dec-1999
and now the nslookup...
# nslookup etoy.com NS.C3.NET
Server: visio.c3.hu
Address: 194.38.96.80
Name: etoy.com
Address: 194.38.96.183
seems their dns server is fine, just good ole slowass network solutions is takin their time about it. altho interestingly enough the ip doesn't do anything particularly interesting on the web so either it's /.ed or their isp is havin issues
-dk
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
and yes, my domain name is _supposed_ to be funny dammit... |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
same problem here. (Score:1)
by PimpSmurf
(root@gibson.ck) on Wednesday January 26, @12:19AM EST
(#95)
(User
Info) http://www.slackware.com
|
etoy.com does not resolve. and the previously mentioned IP address does not answer an icmp echo request... hrmmm.. /.ed or maybe it has been hacked by etoys.com's cgi programmers in responce to that press release.
Stupid people do stupid things... Smart people outsmart each other...
--System of a Down |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
well at least it didn't drag out longer (Score:1)
by kc8apf
(kc8apf@ti-files.org) on Tuesday January 25, @10:35PM EST
(#35)
(User
Info) |
It could have been drawn out for a long time and wasted lots of money. Now we can all go focus our attention on DeCSS instead of domain squabbles. Big companies just always want everything don't they?
kc8apf |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Good News .. Hopefully More to Come (Score:1)
by JLester on Tuesday January 25, @10:37PM EST
(#36)
(User
Info) http://www.ford-diesel.com
|
This is the best news on Slashdot in several days. Hopefully the DVD and MP3 cases will follow along. This is the way the 'net should work against issues like this. Instead of sending hateful e-mail, let the company and their investors know that you will not buy products from a company that operates this way. If enough people do it, they will eventually have to back down.
"FORMAT C:" - Kills bugs dead! |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
See you next year. (Score:4, Insightful)
by mrsam
(sam@email-scan.webcircle.com) on Tuesday January 25, @10:37PM EST
(#37)
(User
Info) http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/5799/etrouble/
|
I wonder if there's anything that keeps etoys.com from simply refiling the lawsuit before next year's holiday spending season again. My impression is that etoys.com is really getting off scot-free here.
Let's face it, the only way that this kind of bullshit stops would be when ANYONE who brings frivolous and punitive lawsuits of this nature has to pay severe financial sanctions for abusing the legal process.
I'm, of course, not talking just about the etoys episode, but of others like that, like the current nonsense with the DVD-CCA. I'm not a big fan of class-action lawsuits, but I think that something like that, a class-action lawsuit, would be perfectly appropriate here. In my dreams, I see every Linux owner who wants to be able to play DVDs certified as a member of a class in an action against the DVD-CCA for restraint of trade and anti-competitive practices. The DVD-CCA is preventing anyone from introducing competitive DVD playing software, using coercion and intimidation. Microsoft is about to be grabbed by the short hairs, for doing something very similar, why can't the DVD-CCA?
--
E*Trouble ! (updated Nov 9) |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:See you next year. (Score:1)
by Comte on Tuesday January 25, @11:51PM EST
(#84)
(User
Info) |
It is my understanding, based on the media reports of the settlement, that both sides have withdrawn their respective suits and countersuits "without prejudice", which essentially gives either side the option to reinstante their legal action at anytime in the future, should they so choose. So, you point is well taken. However, given the intense negative publicity, not to mention catastrophic stock devaluation Etoys has suffered, it hardly seems likely that they would do so. But, maybe they think people on the 'net have attention spans similar to that of their customers...
CPC
Semper Ars
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Long-term viability? (Score:1)
by Datafage on Tuesday January 25, @10:38PM EST
(#38)
(User
Info) http://www.angelfire.com/ct/datafage
|
This is undeniably good news. However, representative of hackers vs. corps as it was, the issue in and of itself was minor. The DeCSS conflict, for example, is much more important. If etoy got destroyed, it would be a symbolic tragedy, but if DeCSS is destroyed, far more people will be inconvienienced. If DeCSS results in a victory for us, it will be a much more public and important victory. If this victory can be recreated in that arena, it will be much more meaningful. That said, this is extremely good news, just when things were getting worse.
-----------------------
Eating info since 1982. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
RTMark Reaction (Score:4, Redundant)
by mx80 on Tuesday January 25, @10:41PM EST
(#40)
(User
Info) http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~h2so4/etoy.html
|
| January 25, 2000
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ETOYS FINALLY DROPS LAWSUIT, PAYS COURT COSTS
Waited a month to make good on promise, just in time for earnings report
Contact: mailto:etoyfund@rtmark.com
More information: Press cverage, RTMark etoy Projects, etoy Toywar Platform, Shell Oil,
Nazi toy
Four weeks ago, Internet toy giant eToys announced to the press that it
was "moving away" from its lawsuit against European art group etoy in
response to the torrent of public outrage. As the weeks went by without
further action, however, many activists decided that eToys' words had
represented a typical corporate ploy to derail opposition, and that the
company had no intention of actually dropping the suit.
Activists quickly renewed their campaigns against eToys. RTMark
initiated two new campaigns to drive eToys' stock price yet further
down (it has now sunk well below its opening value of $20 per share,
after a high of $67 reached the day the protests began), and a new
community platform, http://www.toywar.com, gathered a "toy army" of
1400 activists poised to perform "operations" on command.
The strongest attack to date was scheduled to coincide with eToys'
earnings announcement on Thursday. Today, just in time, eToys
formally dropped its case against etoy "without prejudice"--a phrase
that means either party is still free to attack the other. eToys has
also formally agreed to pay etoy's court costs and other expenses
incurred as a result of the lawsuit.
"A precedent has now finally been set in stone," said RTMark
spokesperson Ray Thomas. "eToys thought it could act like corporations
typically do, but it had no idea how the Internet works. Now e-commerce
corporations have a choice: either obtain a legal stranglehold on the
Internet, so that this kind of defensive reaction is no longer possible,
or behave decently towards the humans who use this medium for purposes
other than profit."
"This is the Brent Spar of e-commerce," said Reinhold Grether, an
Internet researcher and a mastermind of the anti-eToys campaigns. "Just
as the petroleum industry learned it had to listen to environmentalists,
so e-commerce companies have now learned that the Internet doesn't
belong to them, and they can't do whatever they want with it." (See
http://rtmark.com/shell for more about the Brent Spar, and
http://www.hygrid.de/etoyrhiz.html for more comments by Grether.)
"eToys will try to paint this as a misunderstanding, as just a simple
error that has now been corrected," wrote etoy in a prepared statement.
"But this is not what happened. They tried to destroy us, and that got
them into very big trouble. They wanted to drop their case 'with
prejudice,' because they fear further attacks and trademark battles,
but now they see they have no choice at all in the matter. It is a
total victory."
WHAT NOW?
Even though etoy has recovered its domain, the etoy Fund will not be
retired, said RTMark spokesperson Thomas. Each project's discussion
board will continue to function, and the resources of the etoy Fund
pages will continue to be accessible for use and research.
"We hope that this campaign continues to serve as a reminder to people
of what corporations do when left to their own devices, and as a
reminder to corporations of what they cannot do, at least on the
Internet," said Thomas. "We also hope people continue expressing their
anger at eToys, if they so choose. There are many ways to embarrass and
further damage this company--the Nazi figurine eToys advertises
Read the rest of this comment...
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:RTMark Reaction (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @03:23AM EST
(#119)
|
I oppose what eToys did, but trying to smear them for selling a "Nazi figurine" is absurd. I suppose all those kids who grew up assembling model panzer kits and such were closet Nazis, eh? Let's try to stick to the issues of the case and not stoop to infantile tactics.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:RTMark Reaction (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @05:09AM EST
(#124)
|
Agreed. The immaturity on this forum disturbs me -- even if it is in support of a good cause. Articulate argument not laden with ad hominem, personal or deflecting attacks are much more efficient.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:RTMark Reaction (Score:1)
by ronfar on Wednesday January 26, @09:04AM EST
(#132)
(User
Info) http://members.tripod.com/gamesandpolitics/
|
| It surprises me that someone would make this claim, I mean my brother had the whole Raiders of the Lost Ark set of action figures, and as you might expect it included that tough Nazi who got chopped up in the airplane propellor (I think it also included that sadistic Gestapo guy in the black trenchcoat). I'm hoping that people aren't going to try to make the case that we should boycott Steven Spielberg because of this.
Truthfully, I don't see how an artists group could say, "We are opposing censorship by encouraging censorship," but perhaps this is just typical of avant guard artists seeing nothing worthwhile in pop-art, like action figures or comic books.
It reminds me of Wolfenstein 3D for the Super Nintendo, somehow removing all the Nazi imagery and having your marine fight some generic evil dictator was supposed to be "sensitive." Yet having the same imagery in two of the three Indiana Jones movies was not considered insensitive, all Nintendo's actions showed me were that some people were determined to keep game consoles a kiddy media in which no serious content would be allowed. We've come a long way since then, witness the Steven Spielberg produced game Medal of Honor, essentially Wolfenstien 3D with an upgraded realistic engine.
Again, I would hope people aren't going to say, "Boycott Medal of Honor" because it has Nazi's in it. Remember, if you can't talk about Nazi's you can't talk about all the awful things they've done, and that doesn't help anyone.
My Signature: Join the EFF DeCSS, view source! |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
stock price (Score:1)
by soygreen on Tuesday January 25, @11:02PM EST
(#47)
(User
Info) |
| no one got hurt - but the message is placed and the eToys share value sunk below its initial price of $20: value on tuesday /
11.12 AM: $19.0625 per share unit.
This is just silly. A shift of $1 in the price of an Internet stock is not even worth reporting. Suggetsing that there is somehow a causal relationship is just somebody's ego talking.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:stock price (Score:1)
by bobalu on Tuesday January 25, @11:09PM EST
(#54)
(User
Info) |
No, it was much higher than the initial IPO price when this started. I don't have the #'s handy, but the drop was significant. Still not necessarily a causal relationship, but way more significant.
The revolution will NOT be televised. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Doesn't change my opinion of etoys (Score:1)
by JAZ on Tuesday January 25, @11:08PM EST
(#53)
(User
Info) |
Backing off on a lawsuit that they were bound to loose doesn't make them any less evil in my opinion.
I doubt they'd care, but before they ever want any of my business again, they'll need to make major restitution to the internet community at large.
maybe throwing some of those high dollar laywers at helping the DVD/DeCSS issue or huge donations to FSF, EFF, and other non profit orgs would be a start.
but until they do, I'll still loathe them as an organization and they'll never see a dime of my business. Or the business of anyone who will listen to me rant for about 5 minutes on the subject.
"Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos."
-- Homer Simpson |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Doesn't change my opinion of etoys (Score:1)
by vanilla on Wednesday January 26, @12:33AM EST
(#99)
(User
Info) |
So, you eToys did everything you asked them to, including paying the legal bills of etoy, and you say you still won't give them a chance. That's unfortunate because:
- It shows companies that they have nothing to gain by doing what you ask of them.
- It shows that your stance is not rational, but rather an emotional ride on the Slashdot bandwagon.
I would respectfully suggest that you give your emotions a little time to cool off and then reconsider. If you have toys to buy and eToys is the best site for them, give them a shot.
And consider this: eToys actually did something you asked them to do. How likely is it that Amazon will drop their petty patent lawsuit for you?
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Doesn't change my opinion of etoys (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @02:59AM EST
(#117)
|
| So, you eToys did everything you asked them to, including paying the legal bills of etoy, and you say you still won't give them a
chance. That's unfortunate because:
- It shows companies that they have nothing to gain by doing what you ask of them.
I don't want companies to act like shitheads and then reverse course when myself and others criticize them over it. I want them to not act like shitheads in the first place. To that end, I'd like to see eToys get harshly punished for their behavior. When the story first broke, a few people were talking about etoy possibly filing an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against eToys. I haven't heard any more about this, and I consider it unfortunate. A judgement of a few million dollars against them might serve to deter other companies who are tempted to behave like shitheads.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Doesn't change my opinion of etoys (Score:2)
by radja
(oldshoe@itookmyprozac.com) on Wednesday January 26, @08:40AM EST
(#131)
(User
Info) http://www.ankh.morpork.net/~nobbs/
|
Actually they havent done everything I want them to do. Even if I don't count the fact that I would like them to go bankrupt. They have compensated the legal bills, but what about the other damages done? let alone post a very large public apology and a link to eToy on their sites replacing the normal portal-page. Sure.. they did something. but not enough for me to consider them an honest business (if such a thing exists)
//rdj
Where's my coffee-mug? |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Re:Doesn't change my opinion of etoys (Score:1)
by eln
(eriknielsen@yahoo.com) on Wednesday January 26, @12:51PM EST
(#138)
(User
Info) |
What other damage done are you referring to?
etoy got their legal bills paid, AND a boatload
of free advertising. I'd wager there are many
thousands of people out there that at least will
visit etoy's site on occasion that weren't
even aware of its existence previous to this
fiasco.
eToys did a stupid thing, they got slammed, they
gave it up. etoy got taken offline, but in the
meantime got tons of great publicity.
eToys will pay back the damages they are
responsible for (the legal fees), and etoy will
come back much more successful and popular
than they were before. It's ludicrous to continue
to persecute eToys, and refuse to give them your
business, when they have done no lasting damage.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Whine, whine, whine (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @01:49AM EST
(#112)
|
| So, if etoys files suit against etoy again tomorrow, it won't bother you, right? That's the logical consequence of what you're saying.
I guess this means that if I ever get on your shit list, I might as well be an asshole to you forever -- because it won't make a difference to you if I ever stop.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Fools!!! (Score:0, Troll)
by Foogle. on Tuesday January 25, @11:21PM EST
(#64)
(User
Info) |
Hemos does my laundry!!!!
Haha!!!
-------------------------
"I shake the Devil's hand all the time!! He's my personal bitch!"
- They Might Be Losers
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
| |
|
Poop!!! (Score:0, Troll)
by Foogle. on Tuesday January 25, @11:22PM EST
(#65)
(User
Info) |
Malda eats toasted oats for breakfast!!!!
Haha!!!
-------------------------
"I shake the Devil's hand all the time!! He's my personal bitch!"
- They Might Be Losers
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Cheese!!! (Score:0, Troll)
by Foogle. on Tuesday January 25, @11:22PM EST
(#66)
(User
Info) |
Bring on the GIMP!!!!
Haha!!!
-------------------------
"I shake the Devil's hand all the time!! He's my personal bitch!"
- They Might Be Losers
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re: Imposter (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @12:24AM EST
(#96)
|
no one cares
don't feel special
he probably just chose to impersonate you because you were the first name he saw
also it looks like it was deserving. you're a dork.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
All right! YEAH! (Score:1)
by Arcanix on Tuesday January 25, @11:23PM EST
(#67)
(User
Info) |
You definetly have to be rooting for those guys because that was the best press release I've ever seen in my life!
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
no login required (Score:1)
by Splork
(greg*electricrain*com) on Tuesday January 25, @11:24PM EST
(#68)
(User
Info) http://electricrain.com/greg/
|
I haven't needed a login for the nytimes articles I've seen linked too from slashdot or yahoo in a couple months. I don't recall entering one of the many free logins & passwords either (but wouldn't rule that out, I can forget stupid things like that :). Have they gotten smart and ditched the login idea?
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
| |
|
The Bigger Picture -- Goliaths Are Out of Control (Score:5, Informative)
by Eric_Grimm on Tuesday January 25, @11:30PM EST
(#72)
(User
Info) |
| Several Other Comments ask whether another Goliath vs. David lawsuit is just around the corner. Well, truth is that several Goliath vs. David reverse domain name piracy lawsuits are already pending in the courts and just haven't received any Press yet. (Reverse Domain Name Piracy means the use or threat of lawsuits and big $$ in legal bills to extort the little guy to give up his domain name).
I'm still waiting for jamie (/. regular) to publish something about the Superbowl of Domain Name Disputes (need to trademark that title :) !! ) -- the NFL, NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball are all going after a company called FlairMail (www.FlairMail.com) that makes vanity email addresses (like HotMail addresses, but you get to have [myname]@goyankees.com or [myname]@bulls1.net, instead of advertising for a Bill Gates subsidiary) available for FREE to subscribers. All of the sports vanity names are DIFFERENT from the team names, by adding "go" or "1," and several non-sports names are also available. FlairMail has NEVER claimed to be endorsed, sponsored, or approved by the sports leagues (and it doesn't have to be -- the law does not require the approval of the sports leagues).
Some fans who buy hats and clothing or who subscribe for vanity email addresses may perfer to pay extra for the knowledge that they have the "official" product. Other customers may not prefer to pay extra. The bottom line (and there are quite a few court cases to prove it) is that THAT CHOICE BELONGS WITH THE CUSTOMERS. The sports leagues do not have the right to make that choice for them. But that doesn't stop sports licensing organizations from trying. For example, a couple of months ago, Collegiate Licensing went after a father and son in Ohio for selling "Beat Michigan" sweatshirts. Collegiate Licensing claimed it violated U of Michigan's trademarks. I live in Ann Arbor and I graduated from Michigan law school, and no matter how big a Michigan fan I am, I am still upset and embarrassed by the greed of Collegiate Licensing.
There are lots of other Goliath v. David lawsuits pending or that have been resolved by the courts. Here is a sample (less than a third of the examples I know about):
Avery-Dennison vs. Sumpton -- Vanity Email Business had to go through trial and appeal before "little guy" won on appeal in the Ninth Circuit. Appeals court told the trial court to consider awarding attorneys' fees to deter the big company from doing the same thing again.
Hasbro vs. Clue Computing -- It only cost Eric Robison, a Colorado computer consultant, $100,000 and his marriage to defend himself after toy giant Hasbro decided it wanted to take over the domain name www.clue.com . Robison ultimately "won" in the sense that the court said he could keep his domain name. But did he really "Win?"
Northern Light Technology vs. NorthernLights.com A search engine was not happy enough with its own domain name and the roughly 300+ additional domain names that NLT registered. So the search engine (which is named after a clipper ship) sued one of its neighbors (which uses the domain name NorthernLights.com -- a reference to the Aurora Borealis), in an effort to take over that domain name, too. The defendant (NorthernLights.com) was using the domain name almost an entire year before the search engine website was launched. The case is still pending in Boston federal court. The judge has suppressed the expressive activity of the little guy by ordering a black "jump page" to be posted in front of his website. (I confess I have a personal interest in this one and the "Superbowl" case.) See http://www.NorthernLights.com/new/
HealthNet.org -- this website belongs to a charitible group of international physicians. However, there is an insurance comapny in California that already owns HealthNet.com and HealthNet.net. As you can imagine, the Insurance company sent a threatening letter to the physicians' organization, who had to file a Read the rest of this comment...
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:The Bigger Picture -- Goliaths Are Out of Contr (Score:1)
by keefer
(keefer+slashdot@tzone.logicalalt.com) on Wednesday January 26, @02:46AM EST
(#115)
(User
Info) |
| Thank you for the informative post, but what I personally think would be greatly appreciated is perhaps more information on the Cybersquatting act.
You make good points about what SHOULD be common sense cases, i.e. people using their own names in businesses, businesses or websites formed way before a company even existed, etc. But there IS in fact a problem out there. It is easily illustrated by checking out this yahoo link. These are all domain name brokers, where you can go to buy or sell domain names.
There are literally thousands, maybe even 10s of thousands of domain names just sitting there by people speculating that someday they'll be useful. A quick check at the domainmart on that yahoo page shows e-businesstv.com available for US$1,000,000! eJobSeeker is a relative bargain for only $1,795.
Big clue: No one on any of those domain-name-for-sale registrars ever has any intention of ever using them. To me, that is what the cybersquatting rule should really enforce, because I agree that trademark rule should apply to cases where it is generally obvious the name in question has nothing to do with the owner of the name.
In my personal perfect world, owning a domain name would be like owning a patent (yes, I know patents don't work like this now, that's part of my point): You should be actively engaging in using your IP or domain name or whatever for it to really be enforceable. Companies I have worked for have been stymied by people that own patents, despite the fact that no product has ever been produced by them utilizing said patent. If you're not using it, and we come up with this idea, and it turns out some schmoe has a patent on it, we can't do it.
I feel that trademarks, patent law, all that stuff does in fact have its place. To me, it seems obvious that etoy was clearly in the right, having existed long before etoys came into being. But the world is driven by lawyers, not by logic. So any light you could shed into this murky bog would be greatly appreciated.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
I'm not sure. . . (Score:1)
by Cyberllama
(RyanMercado@mad.scientist.com) on Tuesday January 25, @11:37PM EST
(#74)
(User
Info) |
Is paying another companies legal fees enough to compensate for completely removing them from the market during the holiday season when more toys are sold than any other time of year?
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
| |
|
What could be better than this? (Score:1)
by claustro on Tuesday January 25, @11:42PM EST
(#79)
(User
Info) |
All that can be said is let this be a lesson. This really is a great day in internet history.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Timing (Score:3, Insightful)
by Lupus Rufus on Tuesday January 25, @11:57PM EST
(#85)
(User
Info) |
Does anyone else think the timing of these proceedings is a little strange? Back when people were discussing the lawsuit in the first place, I remember there being talk of how Etoys didn't want to lose a chunk of marketshare during the Christmas season rush to people mistakenly going to etoy or becoming disgusted with Etoys as a result of going to etoy. Well, now the Christmas season is over and done with, so the incentives for Etoys to maintain the injunction against etoy have evaporated. They're only pandering to the free-internet-speechers once their original purpose (to protect holiday-season mind- and marketshare) has been amply satisfied.
THIS IS HARDLY A VICTORY.
If Goliath can push David around until Goliath gets his feast, only then letting poor David go, Goliath is still in charge. As others have said, the only way to assure a proper victory is to make sure stupid preliminary injunctions cannot be carried out in the first place. This requires a court decision or legislation. Since the latter is pretty unlikely (Wall Street owns Congress, yadda yadda yadda), we need someone to take one of these lawsuits to completion.
How about a countersuit, etoy? You and the rest of us first-amendment-pushers deserve to reap the rewards.
Banach-Tarski: Because size shouldn't matter. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
e-mails (Score:1)
by jesser on Wednesday January 26, @12:11AM EST
(#87)
(User
Info) http://www.palosverdes.com/jesse/
|
On Dec. 29, eToys offered to dismiss the suit after receiving what Ross at the time called "a lot of heartfelt, well-reasoned e-mails."
I'm sure eToys also got a fair number of flames, too, but I wonder if this means there was a good logical-argument-to-flame ratio this time.
--
slashdot: I miss my free time, Rob. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:e-mails (Score:2)
by radja
(oldshoe@itookmyprozac.com) on Wednesday January 26, @08:32AM EST
(#129)
(User
Info) http://www.ankh.morpork.net/~nobbs/
|
And pigs can fly... Probably what did the trick was thousands of email, each with the contents: We don't like you, the way you conduct business and I am spreading this to everyone I know. Furthermore, I am blocking your site, cancelling my orders (if any) and I'm not ordering anything from you anymore. It's not nice, it's not eloquent, but if enough people yell it in your ear...
//rdj
Where's my coffee-mug? |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
"shares" (Score:1)
by jesser on Wednesday January 26, @12:17AM EST
(#91)
(User
Info) http://www.palosverdes.com/jesse/
|
From the NY Times aricle,
Once the injunction is lifted, etoy will again be able to sell its "shares" -- another of its pseudo-corporate projects -- in the United States. Those who supported the group during the lawsuit will be rewarded with shares, which are more valuable as a result of the suit, zai said.
Is slashdot one of the recipients of these "shares"? If so, do these "shares" count legally (will Rob, etc. now be required to say "Disclaimer: we own shares in etoy"?)
--
slashdot: I miss my free time, Rob. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Re:"shares" (Score:2, Informative)
by anonymous cowerd
(WKiernan@concentric.net) on Wednesday January 26, @12:51AM EST
(#104)
(User
Info) http://www.concentric.net/~Wkiernan/index.html
|
An etoy "share" is an artwork, not a financial instrument. Inasmuch as etoy are artists with a certain degree of fame, I suppose an etoy "share" is worth something in terms of money, like a sculpture or a painting, but it does not have the same kind of value as an share of stock, that is, a fractional part of the value of the issuing organization.
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
|
Can't you see what their only purpose was? (Score:2, Interesting)
by darkwhite
(ak@aURLadaykeepsspamaway.creativegeometry.com) on Wednesday January 26, @12:34AM EST
(#100)
(User
Info) |
Etoys' only purpose was to shut the site down for the Chrismtas season when they were generating huge earnings. After December 26 or round about they didn't give a damn about Etoy. Of course, now they are dropping the suit "in the spirit of good will and open-mindedness" or whatever.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
one small step... (Score:1)
by Colbey
(moriarty00@spamsucks.tmbg.org) on Wednesday January 26, @12:48AM EST
(#102)
(User
Info) http://members.aol.com/moriarty00/
|
| OK, I'm happy. Score one point for the little guy. Cograts, etoy!
Now onto the bigger battles. Amazon, DVD CCA, and (though this one seems less clear-cut) RIAA vs. everyone. But it's heading in the right direction....
--Josh Rosenberg (Colbey)
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
does the spirit of Nietzsche live still? (Score:2, Insightful)
by arcus on Wednesday January 26, @06:21AM EST
(#127)
(User
Info) http://arc.stuff.gen.nz
|
| "IT WAS A PLEASURE TO DO BUSINESS WITH ONE OF THE BIGGEST E-COMMERCE GIANTS IN THE WORLD: F*U*C*K*I*N*G* INTENSE & REALLY EXPENSIVE BUT A KICK FOR ALL OF US! WE ALL LEARNED A LOT"
"THANK YOU FOR HELPING US GROW!"
How very Nietzchen. Not to mention loud.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
What happened to Amazon/BN? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 26, @09:33AM EST
(#134)
|
bn.com has express checkout available again. Did Amazon.com drop the suit? Whazzup?
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Only the lawyers are getting fat on all this (Score:2)
by Morgaine on Wednesday January 26, @10:25AM EST
(#135)
(User
Info) |
Like arms dealers, lawyers supply both sides of the field, always win regardless of which side loses, and never get tarnished with the mud and blood that flies.
Somehow that doesn't seem right.
|
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
Unenforceable suit? (Score:2)
by nstrug
(nstrug@bu.edu) on Wednesday January 26, @11:57AM EST
(#137)
(User
Info) http://crsa.bu.edu/~nstrug/
|
| Could someone explain to me why eToy even bothered responding to this suit? How can the decision of a judge in Los Angeles be enforced against an artist collective in Zurich? And why would a Californian judge even bother to make a ruling on a case that is clearly out of his jurisdiction?
Nick
One at a time or all together, it makes no odds to me. |
| [ Reply to This
| Parent
] |
|
| |
9 replies
beneath your current threshold.
|
|
Posted by Roblimo on Tuesday January 25, @08:25PM
eToys Inc. Drops etoy Suit - For Real This Time